Jump to content


Photo

Sedition and Seditious Libel


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 10 February 2019 - 08:53 AM

"Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent towards, or resistance against established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition."

 

The above description has been directly copied from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition

 

This might be a little weird but I have to ask it, can we charge our State and National Representatives who draft unconstitutional laws and create anti constitutional verbiage with Sedition? They clearly know that their infringement upon gun owners rights are unconstitutional and refuse to go thru the proper legal procedure (repealing/revising the 2nd Amendment) thus seeking to make laws that attack the very frame work of our constitution and start an illegal prosecution/persecution of people like myself who are legal, and law abiding citizens living under the protection of the current constitution.

 

These proposed laws are not legal/unconstitutional and therefor I am not obligated, as an American Citizen, to adhere to them - they are illegal laws. In fact, as an American Citizen, am I not bound to actively resist these illegal and unconstitutional laws much as a citizen who has been captured and imprisoned (soldiers) have a duty to escape?

 

Can we sue/charge our Representatives with Sedition and seditious Libel because they are actively going against the established norms and Constitution of the United States of America? Are these people not criminals? What would happen if groups of people and organizations bonded together to demand that these people be charged or hire attorneys to sue the individual sponsors for this Seditious Libel. Can someone way smarter than me explain to me why i can't hire a lawyer and sue these folks?

 

Thanks in Advance!

 

VooDoo


Edited by Vodoun da Vinci, 10 February 2019 - 08:55 AM.


#2 C0untZer0

    Contributing Member in Arrears

  • Members
  • 13,268 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 10 February 2019 - 09:53 AM

Not based on Wikipedia's definition...

 

The United States once had a law governing sedition -  the Sedition Act of 1918.

 

The Sedition Act of 1918 was repealed on December 13, 1920.  The Supreme Court ruling in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969 set a precedent that would make similar laws unconstitutional today if sedition laws were reenacted.

 

 

 

The only way now to re-establish law governing sedition would be a amending the Constitution.

 

We have U.S. politicians on record saying that the NRA is more dangerous than America's avowed foreign enemies, (such as ISIS and Al-Queda), and politicians who have labeled the NRA as a terrorist organization.

 

Sedition laws historically have been misused and abused by whoever is in power to destroy their political enemies.


“Most gun control arguments miss the point. If all control boils fundamentally to force, how can one resist aggression without equal force? How can a truly “free” state exist if the individual citizen is enslaved to the forceful will of individual or organized aggressors?
 
 It cannot.” 

 

― Tiffany Madison― 


#3 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 10 February 2019 - 10:06 AM

Is there any legal precedent to sue or charge these politicians with their unconstitutional acts/verbiage? I mean, can we single them out sue them and make them criminally liable or financially liable for their unconstitutional laws?

 

VooDoo



#4 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,712 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 10 February 2019 - 10:41 AM

 

 

Sedition laws historically have been misused and abused by whoever is in power to destroy their political enemies.

 

This.

 

If we ever have a sedition law that manages to survive judicial scrutiny, I predict it will be used by LWW's to punish non-LWW's. 


Edited by BobPistol, 10 February 2019 - 10:41 AM.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#5 Quiet Observer

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,277 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 15

Posted 10 February 2019 - 04:12 PM

Vodoun, 

 

If your suggestion were carried out, it would lead to chaos and destruction of the Union.  It is generally accepted that laws that are later found to be unconstitutional were passed in good faith.  It would have to be proven that the legislators intended to damage the country and did not simply make an error in judgement.  Legislation is debated with the input of legal professionals who differ on the constitutionality of the proposed legislation.  To carry your suggestion to the extreme would destroy the legislatures and the courts.  As a law is appealed through the system and finally judged to be unconstitutional do we arrest those legislators, lawyers and judges who supported it?  What about the Supreme Court, do we charge those justices on the losing side who voted that law was constitution?  

 

We would be following the example of some 3rd world countries in which the opposition

 is thrown in jail because they lost the election. 

 

Use the link below to examine the actual laws.  I copied the initial section on sedition.   

 

18 U.S. Code § 2384.Seditious conspiracy

U.S. Code

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

https://www.law.corn...t-I/chapter-115


Edited by Quiet Observer, 10 February 2019 - 04:17 PM.


#6 JTHunter

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,290 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 13

Posted 10 February 2019 - 09:34 PM

Observer - that was back then.  Many of these politicians, esp. the "dimocrats", are FULLY AWARE of the highly questionable nature of the bills they either generate or merely vote for, both at the state and federal levels.  That means they ARE in violation of their oaths.


“We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.” - - Abraham Lincoln

“Small minds adhere to the letter of the law; great minds dispense Justice.” - - S. C. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Life member NAHC, Endowment member NRA

#7 spec4

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,207 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 05

Posted 11 February 2019 - 08:19 AM

^^^ Agree 100%.  They violate their oath to uphold the Constitution and never suffer any consequences  Change this and things would be much better.



#8 Bitter Clinger

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,030 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 14

Posted 11 February 2019 - 08:55 AM

Laws should go through an independent Constitutional Review Board, or something similar before they are allowed to take effect.  Since that will probably never happen, there needs to be some kind of punishment for politicians who pass unconstitutional laws.

 

The problem we have today is that politicians can pass whatever they want, even if it's blatantly unconstitutional and they don't care because nothing ever happens to them.  Even if their so called "law" eventually gets overturned, there are many people who's lives are destroyed because of it.

 

There needs to be consequences. 



#9 Quiet Observer

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,277 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 15

Posted 11 February 2019 - 04:56 PM

Laws should go through an independent Constitutional Review Board, or something similar before they are allowed to take effect.  Since that will probably never happen, there needs to be some kind of punishment for politicians who pass unconstitutional laws.

 

The problem we have today is that politicians can pass whatever they want, even if it's blatantly unconstitutional and they don't care because nothing ever happens to them.  Even if their so called "law" eventually gets overturned, there are many people who's lives are destroyed because of it.

 

There needs to be consequences. 

 

Constitutionality is part of the debate of major bills in the various municipal, state, and federal legislatures.  Such a review board is redundant and might be unconstitutional since the Article 3 of the Constitution reserves judicial powers to the courts.  The option to petition the courts for an injunction to delay enactment of a law exists now.  In Mayberry v. Madison the Supreme Court declared that it was the final arbiter of constitutional.  

Balanced, as well as liberal and conservative controlled legislative bodies, have passed laws that were later found to be unconstitutional.  

 

Numerous federal and state laws have been declared by the courts to be unconstitutional. 

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/acts-of-congress-held-unconstitutional.html 

https://law.justia.c...titutional.html 

 

The Constitution does not designate any punishment for passing or signing a bill that is later found to be unconstitutional. 

 

There has not always been total agreement among the Justices of the Supreme Court on what is or is not constitutional.  On some cases a so-called liberal or conservative justice has crossed over to vote with the other side.  

Why should a legislator or executive be held to a higher standard?



#10 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 11 February 2019 - 06:12 PM

My concern is that we have "Representatives" who seem to feel that they are immune to liability for sponsoring or promoting unconstitutional legislation. They don't seem to care what the Constitution says or what we want or what is legal. Is there any way to charge them, sue them, or call them out for sponsoring illegal/unconstitutional legislation? 

 

I want to get a 100 or 1000 people together and sue these people for going against the US Constitution. Cannot that happen? Can these people just keep proposing and sponsoring illegal/unconstitutional laws forever with no way to call them out legally? It seems not..they are inciting Revolution and Civil War and enacting laws that will criminalize a significant portion of American citizens and our only recourse is to capitulate, vote them out, or become criminals in defiance of unconstitutional laws.

 

It seems to me that many of these folks (elected officials) have less regard for the law and Constitution than most of us gun owners. And there is no way to make them accountable for their actions?

 

I'm literally distraught over my elected representation breaking the law and ignoring the Constitution. I'm appalled. Yet there is nothing we can do legally to make them accountable.

 

VooDoo



#11 Quiet Observer

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,277 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 15

Posted 11 February 2019 - 06:44 PM

If it were all that simple and obvious, there would have been lawsuits and prosecutions by liberal and conservation individuals, officials, and groups decades ago.  

In Illinois the ISRA and other 2A groups would have sued Madigan years ago.  

 

A country is in trouble if people only respect the legislative process when it agrees with the outcome.  

 

Last year a federal judge declared that President Trump's policy to withold federal funds from "sanctuary cities" was unconstitutional.  

Should the President have been impeached for violating the Constitution? 

https://www.westernjournal.com/u-s-district-court-california-finds-trumps-sanctuary-city-executive-order-unconstitutional/ 

 

I think almost every President has had some action of his, or legislation he signed, found to be unconstitutional by the courts.


Edited by Quiet Observer, 11 February 2019 - 07:32 PM.


#12 gunuser17

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPip
  • 114 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 17

Posted 11 February 2019 - 08:23 PM

Legislative immunity protects legislators from being sued for taking actions, such as voting for a bill, so long as the action is part of their official duties.  Commit a crime and not immunity.  Vote for a bill that someone else considers unconstitutional and that legislator is protected from suit.



#13 Hatchet

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,889 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 07:31 AM

 

 

I'm literally distraught over my elected representation breaking the law and ignoring the Constitution. I'm appalled. Yet there is nothing we can do legally to make them accountable.

 

VooDoo

There is, you have to vote them out. Helping his opponent, or even running yourself if need be. My rep runs unopposed every 2 years, i have been talking with my wife about throwing my name on the ballot just so there is another option.


"Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it."
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." (Winston Churchill).

#14 RANDY

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 622 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 07

Posted 12 February 2019 - 07:50 AM

Legislative immunity protects legislators from being sued for taking actions, such as voting for a bill, so long as the action is part of their official duties.  Commit a crime and not immunity.  Vote for a bill that someone else considers unconstitutional and that legislator is protected from suit.

Public officials need to loose their immunity when they testify on the IL house floor that this bill is unconstitutional but we need to pass it anyway. And yes that actually happened in 2013.

 

And I support removing immunity from all public officials.  If they violate the constitution or their oath of office they need to be held accountable.


Edited by RANDY, 12 February 2019 - 07:52 AM.

One persons paranoia is another persons situational awareness.

Fastest way to end violence is to ban Democrats. 


#15 gunuser17

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPip
  • 114 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 17

Posted 12 February 2019 - 09:56 AM

Good luck with eliminating immunity.  Speech or Debate Clause

Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution states in part,
 
for any Speech or Debate in either House, [senators and representatives] shall not be questioned in any other place.
 
That pretty much covers Congress.  Many state constiitutions, including Illinois, have such a provision.  Let's face it, every vote by a state representative has people that don't agree with the vote and often believe the new law is unconstitutional.  While I don't like what democrats do in Illinois, we can't tie up elected officials in never ending litigation and that is what would happen without the clause regardless of party.  The answer is to muster up the votes and vote them out and then repeal the law.  That is the system we have.

Edited by gunuser17, 12 February 2019 - 09:59 AM.


#16 JTHunter

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,290 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 13

Posted 13 February 2019 - 01:54 PM

Yet there is nothing we can do legally to make them accountable.

 

VooDoo

 

"Legally"?  Probably not. :devil:  :drool:  :ninja:


“We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.” - - Abraham Lincoln

“Small minds adhere to the letter of the law; great minds dispense Justice.” - - S. C. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Life member NAHC, Endowment member NRA

#17 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 13 February 2019 - 06:59 PM

So, our only hope is the Vote. Thanks for the perspective and information. I do truly appreciate it.

 

VooDoo



#18 Tango7

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,862 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 08

Posted 14 February 2019 - 11:24 AM

While we're at it, why not invoke Murdock v Pennsylvania about the FOID, if not the FCCL, and having to pay a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal Constitution?


You will not 'rise to the occasion', you will default to your level of training - plan accordingly.

Despite their rallying around us at election time, honoring only 8 hours of Illinois' 40+ hour law enforcement class towards a 16 hour requirement shows the contempt that our elected officials hold us in.

#19 THE KING

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,545 posts
  • Joined: 19-March 09

Posted 15 February 2019 - 08:57 AM

While we're at it, why not invoke Murdock v Pennsylvania about the FOID, if not the FCCL, and having to pay a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal Constitution?

Makes sense. I wonder why someone (Lawyer wise) hasn't used this in a 2nd Amendment case.

 

It's cases like this that need to be pushed into the faces of the lawyers. It will either force the judicial system to recognize the 2nd amendment as a "right" or have some explaining to do why they won't uphold a SCOTUS case.



NRA Patriot Life Member - Endowment
ISRA Member
NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
ISP Certified Illinois Conceal Carry Instructor
Retired Professional Firefighter / Paramedic


#20 the possum

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts
  • Joined: 07-February 13

Posted 15 February 2019 - 09:15 AM

While we're at it, why not invoke Murdock v Pennsylvania about the FOID, if not the FCCL, and having to pay a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal Constitution?

 

Point of order:

The rights are not granted by the Federal Constitution.  They are granted by Almighty God.  The constitution merely recognizes them.



#21 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 16 February 2019 - 11:09 AM

Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration states, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness….”

 

My Rights stem from whoever/however I was created - I was born with these rights as are all men. The Constitution merely documents it and serves as the framework and recognizes these Rights.

 

I'm not a believer in God but I do believe we are all created with these unalienable rights.

 

VooDoo



#22 EdScubaDVR

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • Joined: 13-February 19

Posted 19 February 2019 - 01:57 PM

VooDoo

 

Food for thought there is only 1 set of rights congress is not allowed to pass laws against those are the ones protected by the first amendment. Unfortunately everything else is up for interpretation.  

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



#23 357

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,457 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 12

Posted 19 February 2019 - 06:26 PM

VooDoo
 
Food for thought there is only 1 set of rights congress is not allowed to pass laws against those are the ones protected by the first amendment. Unfortunately everything else is up for interpretation.  
 
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/size]


Congress is not allowed to pass laws against the whole bill of rights, all 10 amendments not just one. That's why is called the bill of rights.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"
George Orwell

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will loose both"
Benjamin Franklin

#24 Vodoun da Vinci

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 118 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 14

Posted 03 March 2019 - 07:20 PM

One more question and then I'll retire to read only and stop asking stupid questions and stirring the pot.

 

If I am called to testify...perhaps by congress, they put my hand on a bible and make me swear an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help me God. And if I lie I commit perjury and I am held accountable and prosecuted. But if a Representative, who has put his hand on a Bible and taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution repeatedly lies and sponsors/writes bills that are blatantly unconstitutional (over and over again) and blatantly does exactly the opposite of what he told folks he'd do if elected  that person is not accountable and not able to be prosecuted for lying to The People or breaking a legally binding oath? I'm accountable and can be prosecuted for perjury/ lying to Politicians but the Politicians are not accountable and can not be prosecuted for the same crime.

 

Right?

 

VooDoo


Edited by Vodoun da Vinci, 03 March 2019 - 07:25 PM.


#25 soundguy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,897 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 05

Posted 03 March 2019 - 07:27 PM

 

VooDoo
 
Food for thought there is only 1 set of rights congress is not allowed to pass laws against those are the ones protected by the first amendment. Unfortunately everything else is up for interpretation.  
 
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/size]


Congress is not allowed to pass laws against the whole bill of rights, all 10 amendments not just one. That's why is called the bill of rights.

 

 

Congress can pass any darned thing they want, no matter what it might violate.

It's up to the other two branches to push back.

It's up to WE to put the right folks in office.


Life is a cooperative venture... That's what makes it work.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users